Which (If any) member of the Triplets was overrated?

[dfense]

According to all fans other than Dallas fans...each guy was just a product of the players he had around them...

Aikman was only good because he could hand it off to Emmitt and throw to Irvin.

Emmitt was only good because of his o-line and having Aikman and Irvin take the pressure off.

Irvin was only good because he had Aikman throwing the ball and Emmitt shouldering the load.

I ask, do you believe any of the Triplets was a product of the other players around him? Who gets the most and least credit when talking about these guys?

Ok, seriously,

Aikman was accurate and great because he was consistant and had a line that could protect and maul at the same time. He had the best running game in the league which didn't hurt.

Emmitt was the greatest, period. MVP's, rushing titles, everything. He could run, catch and block. Will never get the full credit for how good he was. He's the reason Aikman doesn't have high TD numbers. inside the 5, was Emmitt time.

In my opinion, Irvin was the straw that stirred. He would not let the team lose. Double teamed his entire career and could not be stopped. My favorite Cowboy player of all time. You can track the Cowboys downfall to the day Irvin got hurt. Team was never the same.

Here's some trivia to. Michael Irvin never, in over 1500 tests, ever failed a drug test.

 

[BoysFan4ever]

None of them as far as I have ever read were overrated.

 

[rcaldw]

aikman couldnt win without emmitt...emmitt won without aikman.

aikman is easily overrated. He had a STAR QB and a ridiculous good WR and still posted up terrible numbers.

Troy is ranked 42nd all time with a 81.6 qb rating.

That is simply turrible. The run game makes your passing game better. Can you imagine what he would have done without emmitt? Probably been labeled a bust.

The first part of this deal is the most overused and underthought (I probably just made up a word) statement in Cowboys land. It all goes back to when Emmitt held out and Dallas started off 0-2 in 1993. Its a dumb argument.

1. The two really didn't play that many games in which the other didn't show up.
2. If their careers had ended in 1990 you could have made just the opposite argument. Dallas dug out of a 3-7 start and won 4 straight games. They went to Philly with a 7-7 record and a chance to make the playoffs. Aikman went down with a separated shoulder. They lost the game. They lost the next game. Emmitt played in both of those games. In 1990 Emmitt couldn't win a game without Aikman.

3. Emmitt was around after Aikman retired. How did we do with winning then?

4. Even after 1993, Aikman DID win games Emmitt didn't play in (or barely played in). I mention the barely played in because they actually blew out the Green Bay Packers in a 1994 playoff game that Emmitt barely played in due to injury.

 

[DFWJC]

Wrong site to ask this question.

Go to any of the other 31 sites in the league and, right or wrong, you would full participation on all three.

In my business, I meet a lot of Bears, Packers, and Giants fans for some reason. Also some Saints, 49ers, Commander and Eagle fans. To a man they all think Troy and Emmitt were way overrated. I rarely hear Michael mentioned, but the other two are always front and center when this topic comes up for players around the league.

Jealousy and envy can be pretty unsightly.

 

[SilverStarCowboy]

They were/are all three under-rated.

 

[Doomsday101]

According to all fans other than Dallas fans...each guy was just a product of the players he had around them...

Aikman was only good because he could hand it off to Emmitt and throw to Irvin.

Emmitt was only good because of his o-line and having Aikman and Irvin take the pressure off.

Irvin was only good because he had Aikman throwing the ball and Emmitt shouldering the load.

I ask, do you believe any of the Triplets was a product of the other players around him? Who gets the most and least credit when talking about these guys?

None. What made each man great was putting the team above themselves. For them it was all about winning

 

[Nova]

Wrong site to ask this question.

Go to any of the other 31 sites in the league and, right or wrong, you would full participation on all three.

In my business, I meet a lot of Bears, Packers, and Giants fans for some reason. Also some Saints, 49ers, Commander and Eagle fans. To a man they all think Troy and Emmitt were way overrated. I rarely hear Michael mentioned, but the other two are always front and center when this topic comes up for players around the league.

Jealousy and envy can be pretty unsightly.

Michael is highly regarded among other fans. I post on another forum with fans of all other teams and Emmitt is "overrated and is barely a top 10 RB", Aikman "may not deserve to be in the hall", but Irvin is well respected.

I think we may overrate how good Irvin was, but not the player/winner he was.

 

[Sonny#9]

I don't know about overrated... but I believe Aikman was underrated.

If he had been in a more heavily weighted passing offense he could have put up some hellacious numbers.

From a somewhat objective opposing fan--this is an interesting point. I liken Aikman to Art Monk. He quietly did what he needed to within the system to win. If Monk was in the K-Gun offense, for example, he would have been in the HOF a long time ago, and probably would have put up Irvin-level numbers. If Aikman was in a pass-first offense, he would be talked about in the top QBs of all time territory.

If I had to pick one of the three, I probably would say Smith--and I am not saying he is, he deserves all his accolades, this is simply in terms of this discussion, he was a great running back. His biggest attribute was his longevity--his production after that mark where most RBs drop off the table was unnatural. The guy was never hurt--and when he was he put up 130. He also ran behind one of the greatest lines in NFL history.

And as a side note--here is the problem with the Greatest Running Back discussion: there is a lot of competition. Smith is behind Sanders, Payton, Eric Dickerson, and Jim Brown in terms of YPG. Jim Brown averaged a whopping 104 yards a game. in my opinion, Brown, Smith and Walter Payton should really be in the GOAT discussion. As fun as Sanders was to watch, I would take Smith over him in an instant. Give me a RB that has the vision to hit a hole and follow his blockers.

P.S. I am still convinced he could put up 130 and 2 TDs right now, against the Commanders. He always killed us.

 

[perrykemp]

Wrong site to ask this question.

Go to any of the other 31 sites in the league and, right or wrong, you would full participation on all three.

In my business, I meet a lot of Bears, Packers, and Giants fans for some reason. Also some Saints, 49ers, Commander and Eagle fans. To a man they all think Troy and Emmitt were way overrated. I rarely hear Michael mentioned, but the other two are always front and center when this topic comes up for players around the league.

Jealousy and envy can be pretty unsightly.

I know a lot of Packers fans and most I know will begrudgingly give credit to the 90s Cowboys teams that basically treated a very good / borderline great Packers team like a red-headed stepchild.

That Packer team was loaded and it was basically destroyed in the playoffs by the Cowboys 3 years in a row.

Probably where I think you might hear Packers get conflicted about the triplets is that most Packer fans who watched in that era would argue that Favre was better than Aikman and that Sterling Sharpe was better than Irvin. My own opinion is both of those are near toss ups -- although I'd go with Irvin over Sharpe or no other reason that Sharpe didn't get to play out his career and so we won't ever know how great a career he could have had. As it stands, you still hear Sterling Sharpe mentioned as a HOF candidate despite him only playing 7 years.

 

[BoysFan4ever]

That triplet stuff was before my time & while I don't question Irvin's play I do think he was slimy off the field. He wasn't the only one but drugs, getting caught with prostitutes & all that. I have even read he stabbed another player but who knows?

I realize he has changed & that's great. He was a great player & knowing how it all ended for him is sad. Especially on that field.

 

[cej757]

All I know is when Emmitt Smith or Michael Irvin missed games the offense couldn't do anything. I've seen them win somewhat ugly games without Aikman. And Steve Beurlein got them that Playoff win in Chicago in 91, so I'll say Aikman.

 

[Idgit]

It is a damn shame that Troy was in an offense that didn't fully show his ability. It is also sad that fans can't see that. He was a leader as well. Yes, a real leader that Dallas has been lacking since his retirement.

I agree. None of the Triplets were overrated in my book, but Aikman gets my vote for most underrated. He was just a fantastic player, all around.

 

[visionary]

I agree. None of the Triplets were overrated in my book, but Aikman gets my vote for most underrated. He was just a fantastic player, all around.

i agree with this
one overlooked factor about aikman is that as a QB you have to be a leader (which Aikman was) but you also have to create that balance where others feel important and "part of it", you cant overshadow your colleagues.

i dont think i would take any other QB, RB, or WR from the same era over the three of them and that is the ultimate tribute to them

i know some will quibble about jerry rice, but irvin was the emotional leader and there is no knowing what happens if you take that away and replace him with rice

no way do i take young over aikman or barry over emmitt

 

[noshame]

I don't know about overrated... but I believe Aikman was underrated.

If he had been in a more heavily weighted passing offense he could have put up some hellacious numbers.

Post of the week

 

[RastaRocket]

Ok, seriously,

Aikman was accurate and great because he was consistant and had a line that could protect and maul at the same time. He had the best running game in the league which didn't hurt.

Emmitt was the greatest, period. MVP's, rushing titles, everything. He could run, catch and block. Will never get the full credit for how good he was. He's the reason Aikman doesn't have high TD numbers. inside the 5, was Emmitt time.

In my opinion, Irvin was the straw that stirred. He would not let the team lose. Double teamed his entire career and could not be stopped. My favorite Cowboy player of all time. You can track the Cowboys downfall to the day Irvin got hurt. Team was never the same.

Here's some trivia to. Michael Irvin never, in over 1500 tests, ever failed a drug test.

Cocaine doesn't stay in the system very long

 

[jterrell]

None. Those players were special separately and they flourished together.
Emmitt was a monster as a Gator.
Troy was the top overall pick for a reason.
Mike won as a Cane and was simply a born competitor and leader. Guy basically invented swag.

 

[Hoofbite]

Well everyone knows running doesn't correlate to wins so the answer must be the RB.

 

[Rockport]

I watched the games and i watched them live. I just dont feel the need to give answers to people who post worthless crap just to insult people.

Still i think Aikman was overrated and lived from the talent around him.

There are alot of people who fall in love with a player. Over their love with that player they fail to judge the player by logic.

It's the same here day in day out. When you criticize one player you get 100 responses from fanboys who lack the brain but know how to insult as if they had learned it in school.

You're entitled to your opinion as are we. My opinion is that if you think Aikman is overrated, you're lack of football knowledge is huge.

 

[BoysFan4ever]

I think it was Pat Summerall who said Troy was the most accurate passer he had ever seen.

He might have known a thing or two about QB's.

 

[rcaldw]

All I know is when Emmitt Smith or Michael Irvin missed games the offense couldn't do anything. I've seen them win somewhat ugly games without Aikman. And Steve Beurlein got them that Playoff win in Chicago in 91, so I'll say Aikman.

Beurlein started the next playoff game against Detroit, and we got decimated. Aikman and the Cowboys destroyed the Packers in the 1994 playoffs with Emmitt barely playing due to injury. When you start the "he played and we won", "he played and we lost" thing, it is a lot more nuanced than that. Who were they playing? How did they win? etc. etc. As I already pointed out, in 1990 the Cowboys were within a win of making the playoffs. Aikman went down with a separated shoulder and we lost at Philly and lost against Atlanta. Emmitt started both of those games.